> > I personally like the idea of putting one admin server in each rack.
> >they don't have to be fancy servers, by any means.
>> *LOLOL* At first I was guilty of the one things I am always getting on the
> other guys for-thinking too literally. I was going to say there is no room in
> the rack. Of course, the server would not have to even be on the same
> side of the room. :)
no, I really meant to put one admin server (1u is fine) in each rack.
I'd already have a Gb switch and possibly a high-speed interconnect
leaf in the rack if possible. a modular approach like this cuts
down on cabling and out-of-rack traffic.
> in on a temporary basis. tftp was a problem because of xinetd. We bought 1024
why would you run tftp from xinetd? generally I don't see the point to
inetd anymore - it was a cool hack from days when you wanted lots of
daemons reachable, but didn't want them in memory. I usually remove it.
> >> So now to figure out my next step. I will need local space for logs and data/temp data files.
> >
> > why would you want logs local?
>> We have huge data sets, huge scratch data, huge library data (travel time sets)
> and I worry about network traffic.
if your logs are enough to interfere with other traffic, something's wrong.
but perhaps you don't look at your logs as much as I do (which is why
I want them coalesced.)